Labour failed to tackle patient care scandals because ministers were too
focused on "spin" and delivering a "good news story", a
government adviser has said.

Professor Sir Brian Jarman, of Imperial College London, worked on a government review which will this week show that 14 hospital trusts have been responsible for up to 13,000 "excess deaths" since 2005.

He accused Labour ministers of presiding over a "denial machine" and ignoring his data on high death rates for a decade.

Sir Brian said: "We felt we were banging against a locked door. They were denying our data even though there was no real reason. At the time there was pressure from Downing Street and pressure from ministers.

"The government was in the position of providing the health service and monitoring it, it was a conflict of interest. Ministers have an electoral interest in getting out good news."

Andy Burnham, the shadow health secretary, said he was "fed up" with the accusations. Mr Burnham was in charge of the NHS in England from June 2009 until May 2010.

He told the Murnaghan programme on Sky News: "I object to those kind of accusations being thrown in my direction. I have accounted for my actions today and will continue to do so.

"That is what they [the Conservative Party] are wanting to do. That was the Francis report. Why is it being re-written now? Why are people allowing these general actions to stand. I have accounted for my actions today and will continue to do so.

"What I'm seeing now is a political campaign. Classic Tory diversion tactics. The truth is things have got worse at these 14 NHS hospitals since they got into government."

The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off.

The report will also pile pressure on Labour over its handling of the NHS, with the Conservatives likely to seize on it to attack Andy Burnham, the shadow health secretary who was in charge of the NHS in England from June 2009 until May 2010.

The report, due to be published on Tuesday, will:

•Name 14 hospitals as having excess rates of death, with hundreds of patients dying needlessly at each of them since 2005;

•Severely criticise the worst hospital, Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, which had 1,600 more deaths than would have been expected in seven years – a higher death toll than that at Stafford;

•Show that the warning signs were there for managers and ministers to see, including alarming levels of infections, patients suffering from neglect and appalling blunders such as surgery performed on the wrong parts of bodies.

The report was commissioned in February by the Prime Minister after the inquiry by Robert Francis QC into the Stafford scandal exposed appalling lapses in both care of patients and the regulation of hospitals.

Sir Bruce investigated the 14 hospital trusts with the worst mortality rates over the past two years.

Research carried out by one of Sir Bruce’s advisers, Prof Sir Brian Jarman of Imperial College London, found that in some cases appalling death rates stretched back to 2005.

In total Sir Brian calculated that up to 13,000 patients died needlessly in that period. His analysis shows that in the last five years of the last Labour government, from 2005 to 2010, eight of the trusts had death rates well above the average in at least four of those years.

Mortality rates at Basildon and Thurrock, Blackpool Teaching Hospitals and East Lancashire Hospitals were statistically “high” – persistently above average – in all of the five years to 2010, while Colchester, Dudley, George Eliot, Tameside and United Lincolnshire were “high” in four out of five years before the general election. At the worst hospital, Basildon and Thurrock, the “mortality ratio” from 2005 until last year was 20 per cent above the NHS average, with up to 1,600 more deaths than there would have been if it had the average level of deaths among its patients.

However, from 2005 until 2009 the hospital was given a “good” rating by NHS regulators, first the Healthcare Commission, then its successor, the Care Quality Commission.

Among the worst hospitals exposed in the review is Tameside Hospital Foundation Trust in Ashton-under-Lyne.

At Tameside, which is about half the size of the Basildon and United Lincolnshire trusts, there were more than 830 excess deaths. Christine Green, its chief executive, and Tariq Mahmood, its medical director, resigned just over a week ago, before publication of the report. Several board members have also resigned.

Sir Bruce examined not just mortality rates but also infection levels, the number of patients suffering from preventable and potentially fatal neglect and numbers of so-called “never events”, such as operations on the wrong part of the body or surgical instruments left inside a patient.

He found that at United Lincolnshire hospitals, there were 12 such events in three years, with seven at Basildon and Thurrock and five at Buckinghamshire Healthcare Trust.

Separate research showed that the hospitals were paying out large amounts in compensation for failures and errors. The negligence bills were three times those of the average NHS trust.

Between them, the 14 hospitals have paid £234 million in negligence settlements in the past three years. Many of the cases will date back far longer, as the legal battles often take several years. Tameside and East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust have paid out £30 million each to victims of poor care since 2009.

United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust paid out £28 million and Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals £19 million.

Sir Bruce will say that none of the hospitals was failing on the “scale” of Stafford, sources said, but NHS campaigners will point to the report as evidence of a series of “mini-Staffords”.

The review will decide whether the existing steps being taken by the 14 trusts to improve quality go far enough and whether regulatory action is needed to protect patients.

The recommendations could lead to the removal of the hospitals’ chief executives, or the replacement of entire boards or even the closure of services.

At Basildon and Thurrock just 51 per cent of staff said they would be happy for friends or family to be treated at the hospital, while at United Lincolnshire 55 per cent said so.

At North Cumbria University Hospitals Trust just 35 per cent of staff said last year that they would be happy with the standard of care a relation or friend might receive there should they need treatment, compared with the national average of 60 per cent.

Sir Bruce’s findings were seized on by the Conservatives last night to attack Labour over its handling of the NHS, and particularly, Mr Burnham’s record.

David Morris, a Conservative MP on the Commons health select committee, said: “Andy Burnham and his predecessors missed far too many warnings about high hospital death rates. He should take a long hard look at his record and ask himself whether he is really fit for the role of shadow health secretary.”

The Conservative attack will be stepped up on Tuesday but Labour said last night that it stood by its record.

A spokesman said: “The claim that Labour ignored problems at these hospitals is disgraceful and not supported by a shred of evidence. In fact, the truth is the precise opposite.”

He said Mr Burnham had ordered his own review of five of the hospitals covered by Sir Bruce’s report — Basildon and Thurrock, Medway, Northern Lincolnshire and Goole, Sherwood Forest and Tameside – and claimed its warnings had been “clearly ignored” by the current government “as evidence shows all five hospitals have deteriorated sharply on the Coalition’s watch”.

Two hospitals named by Sir Bruce last night said they had improved their performances.

Colchester trust said its death rate had fallen and was now “within the expected range” and Dudley said current figures showed mortality rates are not above average. Northern Lincolnshire, East Lancashire and United Lincolnshire said they would not comment until the Keogh review is published in full this week. The others did not respond.